According to a new report by staff at the Wall Street Journal, however “it turns out it was Netflix that was doing the throttling.” Netflix admitted on Thursday that it has been secretly throttling video speeds for more than five years for its customers who use wireless services provided by AT&T and Verizon, but said it “doesn’t limit its video quality” for T-Mobile and Sprint customers. It appears Netflix “hadn’t previously disclosed the practice” and only admitted to throttling now because T-Mobile’s chief executive in the U.S. had already spilled the beans.

It appears Netflix has been secretly discriminating against its own customers and ISPs for far longer and on a more widespread basis than previously realized. Until now, evidence of Netflix’s discriminatory practices appeared limited to wired Internet connection services beginning about four years ago.

This shocking new revelation raises some important questions: Why hasn’t the FCC fully investigated past allegations of Internet traffic manipulation by Netflix? What else has Netflix been hiding from regulators in the U.S. and around the world? And, should the U.S. alter its current regulatory stance toward so-called “edge” and over-the-top Internet companies given that Netflix was able to conceal its discriminatory practices from its customers and even from federal regulators for more than five years? Netflix’s customers who didn’t get what they were paying Netflix to deliver, the ISPs whose reputations were damaged unfairly, and the public deserve straight answers to these questions.

If the experience of Canadian regulators is any guide, don’t expect Netflix to be cooperative. During the same hearing when Netflix “categorically” denied that it was throttling Internet traffic, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) ordered Netflix to produce data in confidence about its revenue and viewership. But Netflix refused to provide the data, claiming that the CRTC lacks jurisdiction over Netflix (the same argument it and other over-the-top providers make to avoid regulation in the U.S.) and that the confidentiality protections provided by the CRTC's regulatory process are unsatisfactory. The CRTC responded by striking Netflix’s evidence from the record, because a responsible government regulator “cannot carry out its duties based on mere anecdotal information.”

In light of Netflix’s new throttling revelations, striking Netflix’s arguments from U.S. regulators' records won’t suffice. As despicable as its practices may be, the Internet policy issues at stake here go well beyond Netflix. Policymakers in the U.S. have systematically excluded Netflix and all other over-the-top companies from Internet, privacy and video regulations applicable to ISPs based on the presumption that over-the-top companies lack the incentive or ability to engage in discriminatory or anticompetitive behavior that could harm consumers or competition. Netflix just proved that presumption is dead wrong.

The public policies that govern communications systems should be purposeful, not haphazard. They should be applied in a way that’s even-handed, not in a way that treats one set of industry participants better than another. They should be based on credible, reliable data, not anecdotal evidence offered by large corporations seeking government favors. And when there are credible allegations that a company has secretly engaged in practices that have been deemed harmful to consumers and competition, policymakers should investigate those allegations in good faith, not ignore them.